The Madras High Court recently ruled that fixed deposits and jewels qualify as “property” under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. This clarification makes it possible for citizens to file complaints under Section 23 if their children fail to maintain them after acquiring such assets.
Case Background
The case involved a mother who had two fixed deposits, one worth ₹80 lakh and another ₹90 lakh, nominated in her name after her husband’s demise. Her son and daughter later signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU), dividing all properties equally and agreeing to pay her interest from the deposits. However, the daughter failed to provide the promised support.
The mother alleged that the daughter fraudulently obtained her signature and transferred the deposits to her own name. After being denied relief by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the District Collector, the mother moved to the High Court.
Key Observations by the Court
Fixed Deposits and Jewels Qualify as Property
The court clarified that under the 2007 Act, property is not limited to immovable assets. Fixed deposits and jewels also fall under its definition, making Section 23 applicable in such cases.
Beneficial Legislation Must Be Interpreted in Favor of Older Citizens.
The High Court emphasized that laws protecting older citizens should be interpreted liberally to uphold their rights.
Fraudulent Transfers Can Be Declared Void
The court found that the daughter had fraudulently transferred the mother’s fixed deposits. It stated that even if a older citizen voluntarily transfers property, they expect continued care and support. If this is not provided, the transaction can be declared void.
Violation of MoU Terms
The daughter agreed to pay interest on the deposits but failed to do so. She violated the undertaking given in the memorandum.
Court’s Final Order
The High Court directed the daughter to return the fixed deposits and jewels to her mother. It reaffirmed that older citizens should not be deprived of their property under false promises. Any fraudulent transactions must be reversed to protect their welfare.
This ruling strengthens the rights of older individuals. Thus, ensuring that they are not financially exploited by their children under the guise of emotional support.
